Cited by 23Smoking Behavior and CessationSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesMental Health Treatment and Access

Effectiveness of Proactive Tobacco Cessation Treatment Outreach Among Smokers With Serious Mental Illness

Japuntich, Sandra J, Hammett, Patrick J, Rogers, Erin S, Fu, Steven, Burgess, Diana J, El Shahawy, Omar, Melzer, Anne C, Noorbaloochi, Siamak +2 more·2020·Nicotine & Tobacco Research

Abstract

Introduction: People with serious mental illness (SMI) have a high smoking prevalence and low quit rates. Few cessation treatments are tested in smokers with SMI. Mental health (MH) providers are reluctant to address smoking. Proactive tobacco cessation treatment strategies reach out directly to smokers to offer counseling and medication and improve treatment utilization and quit rates. The current study is a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial of proactive outreach for tobacco cessation treatment in VA MH patients. Aims and Methods: Participants (N = 1938, 83% male, mean age 55.7) across four recruitment sites, who were current smokers and had a MH visit in the past 12 months, were identified using the electronic medical record. Participants were randomized to Intervention (telephone outreach call plus invitation to engage in MH tailored telephone counseling and assistance obtaining nicotine replacement therapy) or Control (usual care). The current study assessed outcomes in participants with SMI (N = 982). Results: Compared to the Control group, participants assigned to the Intervention group were more likely to engage in telephone counseling (22% vs. 3%) and use nicotine replacement therapy (51% vs. 41%). Participants in the Intervention group were more likely to be abstinent (7-day point prevalence; 18%) at 12 months than participants in the Control group (11%) but equally likely to make quit attempts. Conclusions: Proactive tobacco cessation treatment is an effective strategy for tobacco users with SMI. Proactive outreach had a particularly strong effect on counseling utilization. Future randomized clinical trials examining proactive tobacco treatment approaches in SMI treatment settings are needed. Implications: Few effective treatment models exist for smokers with SMI. Proactive tobacco cessation outreach with connections to MH tailored telephone counseling and medication promotes tobacco abstinence among smokers with SMI and is an effective treatment strategy for this underserved population.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ntr/ntaa013

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Evidence-based telephone-delivered smoking cessation interventions can be efficacious but have yielded relatively low cessation rates among people with mental health disorders, typically ranging from 3% to 18%.

    “Although evidence-based telephone-delivered smoking cessation interventions can be efficacious [33], they have yielded relatively low cessation rates among people with mental health disorders, typically ranging from 3% to 18% [33, 34, 35, 36, 37].”
  • Our study achieved a high 86.1% retention rate at 12 months, exceeding typical rates in smoking cessation trials among individuals with mental health disorders.

    “Our study achieved a high 86.1% retention rate at 12 months, exceeding typical rates in smoking cessation trials among individuals with mental health disorders [33, 34].”
  • In a secondary analysis of that RCT focused on participants with serious mental illness, cigarette smoking abstinence rates were 17.6% for intervention vs 10.6% for control (P<0.01).

    “A subsequent secondary analysis of this RCT, focused on participants with serious mental illness [34], revealed cigarette smoking abstinence rates of 17.6% for the intervention group compared to 10.6% for the control group (P < 0.01).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Japuntich, S. J., Hammett, P. J., Rogers, E. S., Fu, S., Burgess, D. J., El Shahawy, O., Melzer, A. C., Noorbaloochi, S., Krebs, P., & Sherman, S. E.
Affiliations
  • Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Hennepin Healthcare, Minneapolis, MN
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • VA NY Harbor Healthcare System (US)
  • Department of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY
  • VA San Diego Healthcare System (US)
Corresponding author
Japuntich, Sandra J
Venue
Nicotine & Tobacco Research
Published
2020-01-20
Volume
22
Issue
9
Pages
1433-1438
ISSN
  • 1462-2203 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-994X
OpenAlex
W3002839298
Cited by
23
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2
FWCI
2.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nicotine & Tobacco Research (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development (IIR-11–291)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
tobacco cessation, severe mental illness, proactive outreach, telephone counseling, nicotine replacement therapy, tobacco dependence treatment, smoking abstinence, veterans, mental health professionals, treatment utilization
MeSH terms
Smokers, Mental Disorders, Counseling, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Telephone, Tobacco Use Disorder, United States, Treatment Outcome, Tobacco Use Cessation, Electronic Health Records, Tobacco Use Cessation Devices

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review